THE PROP DEN is primarily a Darth Vader Prop Discussion Board, but we also deal with other Star Wars Props as well as Prop Replicas from other movies. If you do not yet have an account, set one up, sign in and jump into the Vader Prop Discussions!

For something so real, it amazes me how mysterious the c-scar seems to remain. My thoughts have changed since I last commented on the matter. This time I am using my own observations instead of hearsay. I still have major issues with the way some people try to present this artifact on their castings. Buy I want to try to weigh in again here.

Is it present on the original helmet? Is it present on any authentic castings owned by people here?

I know the answer to the first. On the second, I'll post in the proper thread.

It's hugely exciting to see the ANH helmet. It may not be in the state some people hoped, but it's better than I had hoped it would look.

My thoughts have changed since I last commented on the matter. This time I am using my own observations instead of hearsay.

Well if you had listen to some of us 5 years ago that knew what we were talking about, instead of what gino was having everyone on the RPF believe, you wouldn't had to have changed your view on the matter.

Midnight Trooper wrote:

Is it present on the original helmet?

Yes.

Midnight Trooper wrote:

Is it present on any authentic castings owned by people here?

Yes. It's on the Rick Baker mold and subsequently on the SL and it's on the UK mold which is what the TM was derived from. And yes the TM has the C scar, but we've explained this ad nauseam 5 years ago. Are you going to believe it now?

Gino's claim is that it was just paint. In the most literal way, that is true.

I did listen to you guys who said it was on there, I just didn't belive you. IIRC many people were showing these deep craters or scratches in hugely "enhanced" pictures. I could not belive then, nor do I believe that that is what it looks like on the original helmet.

Gino's claim is that it was just paint. In the most literal way, that is true.

It's not paint. It's physical damage to the area in the paint. That's not the same. Damage causing a paint flake, for example, is not a painted detail.

Midnight Trooper wrote:

I did listen to you guys who said it was on there, I just didn't belive you. IIRC many people were showing these deep craters or scratches in hugely "enhanced" pictures. I could not belive then, nor do I believe that that is what it looks like on the original helmet.

Those blown up "enhancements" were to show it was there. Even on the RB mold it's visible. All of it was shown, but again disregarded. No point to argue about it any further. It's not a painted on detail and never was. gino didn't know what he was talking about even though he "claimed" he did. Pretty sad coming from someone who visited the archives and supposedly saw the mold.

Last edited by Lambotour on Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:07 am, edited 2 times in total.

It was cleaned up. Even on the 'legend, exact as you see it in the movie' casts. There's so much detail missing on those efx casts it isn't even funny, but it's still the best commercially/publicly available vader helmet there is.

Gino's claim is that it was just paint. In the most literal way, that is true.

It's not paint. It's physical damage to the area in the paint. That's not the same. Damage causing a paint flake, for example, is not a painted detail.

I guess that's my attempt at humor. I believe it Is paint. But I didn't say it was painted on. It is most certainly a scratch and I guess I don't know for certain if it goes down into the actual gelcoat. It is pretty superficial. You think it's a paint flake? So do you think the crater I remember from the TM castings is what it's supposed to look like? This is why I'm asking for pictures. Not always because I don't have them, but because I want to be clear about what you guys are trying to say.

I guess that's my attempt at humor. I believe it Is paint. But I didn't say it was painted on. It is most certainly a scratch and I guess I don't know for certain if it goes down into the actual gelcoat. It is pretty superficial.

Are you saying you believe it's a scratch in the paint or a build up of paint causing what looks to be a scratch? I don't believe it's damage to the actual casting, just to the paint.

Midnight Trooper wrote:

You think it's a paint flake?

No I was using that as an example to say a paint flake is not a painted on detail. I believe it's an actual physical scratch/damage etc to that area.

I guess that's my attempt at humor. I believe it Is paint. But I didn't say it was painted on. It is most certainly a scratch and I guess I don't know for certain if it goes down into the actual gelcoat. It is pretty superficial.

Are you saying you believe it's a scratch in the paint or a build up of paint causing what looks to be a scratch? I don't believe it's damage to the actual casting, just to the paint.

The former.

I dont believe there is any paint buildup in that area. Just a scratch in the paint that goes deeply enough to make physical impression.

From one point i find it nice to see that you come back here to the board to ask "us" about that new revelad details and what we think about it.At the other hand i ask me, why you not go to ask that RPF crowd which blacklisted the propden for exact that what we said here in past (which btw. was correct after all that new infos we have now), which if i recall correct you also have supported in past,too ?

Dont' get me wrong , but you just come over here if you can absorp something and that have a bad aftertaste for me.

It was cleaned up. Even on the 'legend, exact as you see it in the movie' casts. There's so much detail missing on those efx casts it isn't even funny, but it's still the best commercially/publicly available vader helmet there is.

I'm puzzled. i remember a pic of the mould posted by efx and the scar wasn't there. It's a mystery.

From one point i find it nice to see that you come back here to the board to ask "us" about that new revelad details and what we think about it.At the other hand i ask me, why you not go to ask that RPF crowd which blacklisted the propden for exact that what we said here in past (which btw. was correct after all that new infos we have now), which if i recall correct you also have supported in past,too ?

Dont' get me wrong , but you just come over here if you can absorp something and that have a bad aftertaste for me.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum